Questionable Unions: Their Role and Relevance in Today’s WorkforceQuestionable Unions:
Introduction
The landscape of labor unions in the Dutch Kingdom is transforming significantly. With union participation in the Netherlands at its lowest since 1963, there’s an increasing disconnect between the objectives of unions and the interests of the workforce they represent. This calls for an examination of the role and operations of unions in the contemporary labor market.
The Commercialization of Unions
Originally established as defenders of workers’ rights, unions increasingly resemble the commercial entities they negotiate against. Their reliance on member contributions for operational costs, including staff salaries, mirrors a business operation. Marketing tactics to boost membership, such as offering discounts and material incentives, further underscore this shift. This approach raises questions about whether unions, in general and in Aruba in particular, prioritize their sustainability over their advocacy role.
Distrust and Dependency on Membership Dues
When negotiating a collective, the first thing the union wants to accomplish is that the employer will withhold membership dues from the employees’ wages and transfer the sum in full to the union. This is a purely operational matter. Why doesn’t the union invoice each member monthly or have their members set up automatic payment orders via their bank? Why would an employer have to get involved with the obligations to pay dues by the members? Acting as a payment agent for the union is not a benefit for the employees but a benefit for the union. Thus, this can be considered as an instance in which the union looks after its financial interests first instead of the benefits of the employees.
The goal of unions demanding employers deduct membership dues directly from wages indicates a lack of trust in members’ commitment. Why would I have to trust my union if my union doesn’t trust me?
It may also suggest that unions may be aware they are not delivering the value they promise, hence their dependence on enforced contributions rather than voluntary support from their members.
The Reality of Strikes and Financial Support
In Aruba, the readiness of unions to call for strikes without having a fund to support members’ wages during these periods, is particularly concerning. When the “no work, no pay” principle is applied by employers, striking workers, especially in the F&B industry, suffer a significant financial loss. They lose their wages for the hours they have not worked; they miss out on tips/gratuities, points, and potentially clients’ loyalty. The waiter who put the work down during a strike and abandoned an active table with guests may feel some resistance from the same guests next time. One can imagine that the guest may ask the manager for a different server because he/she was abandoned by the server last time. Meanwhile, and in stark contrast, union leaders who promote or call for strikes remain financially unaffected. They collect 100% of their salaries or fees. The union leaders say, “we showed force and sacrificed wages.” In reality, only the employees “showed force and sacrificed wages” because the union and its leadership remained financially unaffected. This disparity highlights a need for more accountability and support for members who bear the brunt of collective actions. The unions use the strikes not only to “show force” and “cause pain” but also as a marketing gimmick by ensuring they get as much media as possible to help them grow their commercial enterprise.
Coercive Tactics and Retaliation
There have been instances, including recently by the FTA, where union leaders have aggressively entered employers’ premises, urging union and non-union members to join strikes. This tactic disrupts business operations and places undue pressure on workers. Non-participants, especially non-union members, often face bullying and retaliation, such as being excluded from certain collective working agreement (CWA) benefits. Such coercive tactics undermine the unions’ claim to protect worker rights and instead portray them as entities exerting control through intimidation. The union is willing to infringe upon the law or the rights of employers, ignoring the same principles of laws that allow the freedom of reunion and the right of collective bargaining.
Alternative Approaches to Employee-Employer Negotiation
Given the challenges with traditional union approaches, employees may consider alternative means to negotiate their employment terms. Direct negotiation between employees and employers can allow for more personalized and immediate discussions on work conditions, salaries, and benefits. Employees could choose to hire an attorney or other specialized consultants, which is a one-off fee for the job, instead of having each member pay the monthly fee for the period of the union. If a union fee is Afl. 35, the collective working agreement is for three years. The math tells us the union has a revenue Afl. 35 x 12 x 3 = Afl. 1,260 per member. If the union has 20 members that come out to Afl. 25,200. For that money, the employees could have engaged a lawyer, a mediator, or an HR specialist to assist them in getting the employment terms they want and keep more money in their pockets. This method fosters a direct line of communication, enabling employees to express their needs and concerns without the intermediation of a union. It also encourages a more collaborative and less adversarial relationship between workers and management, potentially leading to mutually beneficial solutions. To be effective, there must be a foundation of trust and openness in the workplace, along with employees’ understanding of employment laws and negotiation skills.
Not all unions are alike
On the other hand, I have also had the pleasure of working with certain in-company unions that are extremely well-organized and that, besides looking after employee benefits, look after the best interest of the business. They fully understand that even to have employment benefits, there must be a solid and sustainable business operation in place, and that must be kept in place. This is refreshing compared to those other unions that seem only to want to take more and more from the businesses.
Governance and Control within Unions
The issue of governance within unions, particularly in Aruba, is a crucial aspect that warrants attention. It begs the question: do these unions adhere to a code of corporate governance? Who controls the unions’ board, and how are staff members selected and managed? The lack of transparency in these areas can lead to concerns about accountability and ethical practices within the union. If unions are to stand as models of fairness and representation, their internal governance should reflect these principles, with clear, democratic processes for decision-making and a transparent approach to leadership and staff appointments. Are the unions ready for this?
Transparency and Negotiation Tactics
The tendency of unions to resort quickly to strikes, sometimes bypassing negotiation processes, and the lack of financial transparency in their operations further erodes their credibility. In Aruba, for example, unions do not regularly publish financial statements. Curiously, the financials are not published on their websites so that their members have full accountability. Unfortunately, they keep members in the dark about operational costs and salaries. This opaqueness conflicts with the unions’ demands for transparency in employer-employee relations. If they publish their financials, it will show transparency, which could also attract new members
Closing
Unions must confront these challenges to remain relevant and effective. They need to reassess their strategies, ensuring that member welfare, rather than organizational sustainability or enterprise interest, is at the forefront. This includes adopting a more transparent approach to their finances and decision-making processes and ensuring that the implications of actions like strikes are fairly shouldered. As the workforce evolves, unions must align with their members’ needs and realities. Only through such a transformation can unions hope to regain trust and reassert their role as true advocates in the modern labor market. If not, it will only be a matter of time before unions dwindle and are replaced by others, such as legal or HR service providers, the next start-up, or Artificial intelligence.
#YourFavorite Columnist #YourFavoriteLawyer
